To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / 10377
10376  |  10378
Subject: 
Re: Why the founding fathers limited government scope (was Re: Rolling Blackouts
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Thu, 10 May 2001 17:56:18 GMT
Viewed: 
2318 times
  
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Frank Filz writes:
> Dave Schuler wrote:

> >   So Joe Smith Toxic Waste Dumping, Inc. can fund a watchdog organization to
> > demonstrate that it's safe to dump industrial sludge into the local
> > reservoir.  Is that what you're envisioning?
> 
> I don't think such a company would really last terribly long.
> If their
> actions really had a wide impact, they would find quite an array of
> folks against them. And not all of the money to hire the lawyers to sue
> them out of existence will come from individuals. Those corporations who
> realize they do a lot better when they have healty populations as
> workers and customers will toss plenty of weight into the fray against
> the poluter.

Two word rebuttal: Phillip Morris.


> Well, if the road was too dangerous, the trucking company would either
> pay for a better road, wouldn't deliver, or whatever. Eventually, the
> costs would balance. If the road is unsafe because the locals wanted too
> cheap a road, it would drive up other costs to the point where people
> would either be comfortable with the risk vs reward, or the better more
> expensive road would look more attractive. The market is capable of
> realizing that and ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure 99% of
> the time

That really isn't true.  Companies have invariably dragged their feet on the
"ounce of prevention" angle.  The cold truth is, as much as businesses get
over-regulated, they invariably brought it on themselves by NOT taking care
of business.


Bruce



Message has 1 Reply:
  Re: Why the founding fathers limited government scope (was Re: Rolling Blackouts
 
(...) Business has never been free to realize that an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. They have never been actually liable for their damages across the long term. They have never existed in an unrestrained market where the government (...) (25 years ago, 11-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: Why the founding fathers limited government scope (was Re: Rolling Blackouts
 
(...) I don't think such a company would really last terribly long. If their actions really had a wide impact, they would find quite an array of folks against them. And not all of the money to hire the lawyers to sue them out of existence will come (...) (25 years ago, 10-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

246 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact

This Message and its Replies on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR